7 ms·
And at the same time: > GrapheneOS is not immune to exploitation, but the fearmongering done in these ongoing attacks on it is very clearly fabricated. They fe
by johnisgood 1y ago
And at the same time:
> GrapheneOS is not immune to exploitation, but the fearmongering done in these ongoing attacks on it is very clearly fabricated. They feel threatened enough by GrapheneOS to engage in coordinated attempts at convincing people that it's unable to protect their privacy and security.
So... they (cops and friends) are saying that GrapheneOS is for criminals, AND that it does not work at protecting anyone's privacy and is not for security. Amazing.
See: https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784553445461948 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784553445461948 and the rest.
- kspacewalk2 1y agoFridges are for criminals too. The very good ones can keep the severed body parts cold for longer, thus preventing spoilage and reports of foul odours from downstairs neighbours. Will Frigidaire and Bosch stop selling this criminal technology to criminals?
- johnisgood 1y agoUK should have an answer to that (see: knives). :D They really are absurd.
- paulryanrogers 1y agoCan I take a moment to say how jealous I am that the UK's mass attack problem is largely about knives and not guns? Here in the land of more-guns-than-humans it feels so much more bleak.
- johnisgood 1y agoYeah, but knives have a wide range of use, whereas guns do not. You cannot buy a kitchen knife because people MAY use it cause harm. It is like forbidding the use of roads because it MAY be used to <insert illegal activity here>. Uses (usage?) of roads are even more broad than uses of knives. I think it is easier to argue in favor of knives (or against the prohibition of ... of knives) than guns, for this reason alone.
- olddustytrail 1y ago> You cannot buy a kitchen knife because people MAY use it cause harm. Yes I can. I have knives I bought recently in my kitchen. How could you possibly believe that people in the UK can't buy knives? Do you realise how foolish that sounds?
- johnisgood 1y ago> Do you realise how foolish that sounds? The irony. Just as foolish as these ways are to prevent violence. These criminals might switch to forks, better get your Government get one step ahead of them. And no, you cannot buy kitchen knives if you are under a certain age, it is ought to prevent a lot of crimes, I am sure.
- olddustytrail 1y agoI see, so when you said "You cannot buy a kitchen knife" it's in the same way as if you live in the USA "You can't drive a car".
- johnisgood 1y agoNot quite, because they prohibited this purchase to prevent "knife crime".
- subscribed 1y agoWhat do you mean? I cna buy kitchen knives in IKEA or literally any supermarket or online shop. Care to explain?
- johnisgood 1y agoI think you've lost the plot. I did say "under age", in fact, I was called out for not having been specific in my initial message, to which I said that the two are not comparable because the prohibition of selling knives for people underaged happened at the time they were starting to fight "knife crime".
- DrScientist 1y agoBack to the parental comment - it's been decided there isn't really a good reason to have most guns and so they are strictly controlled - I mean what's the legit reason for having an assault rifle? Now if the government thinks there isn't really a good reason to have a phone they can't hack ( because they are the good guys right.... and in theory need court orders etc - so there is legal oversight ) then they will see such phones in the same light and consider banning. This is at the core of the argument - and why governments ask for a special backdoor - as they accept a generally secure phone ( to stop your neighbour snooping ) is a good thing, but they are used to being able to tap phones and open letters if a judge gives them permission. Obviously the ironic thing is most phones probably already do have special backdoors - but only for the country where the makers reside - and that countries government doesn't want other governments to know or have acccess. And in the case of fridges - there is no argument there that they aren't legit reasons to own. In the case of knives - zombie knives don't really have legit use, whereas kitchen knives do.
- fifticon 1y agoI can think of a country where they should probably ban windows, given how many people fall out of them.
- ARandomerDude 1y ago“Give me liberty or give me death.” The ultimate point of gun ownership isn’t sporting or even self defense, though they are useful for both. The real reason America is armed is so that if our government ever gets too tyrannical, we can do something about it. Some people may not like that today but if you go back and read what people wrote circa 1775 and forward, this is the clear rationale.
- gishglish 1y ago> The real reason America is armed is so that if our government ever gets too tyrannical It’s been doing that for at least two decades, yet I’m still waiting for you people to get on with it.
- graemep 1y agoEven better, the US has a higher knife murder rate than the UK does. On the other hand IIRC it has a lower rate of at least some types of violent assault. One possible explanation is the healthcare system - fast treatment makes a big difference to the chances of surviving an attack (and are one reason murder rates have fallen over the years, and why developed countries have much lower murder rates). Does anything in the US system delay treatment significantly?
- miki123211 1y agoMy unpopular European opinion is that mass shootings are a cultural problem, not an "access to guns" problem. Cars (especially trucks) can help you achieve similar aims, and are much harder to restrict.
- johnisgood 1y agoYeah, you may want to check https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44665755 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44665755.
- Arch-TK 1y agoThe local police forces can start offering a service where they will cause a controlled leak of the refrigerant in your fridge to reduce its efficiency therefore making it less useful for refrigerating body parts. https://kentandmedwayvru.co.uk/project/pointless/ https://kentandmedwayvru.co.uk/project/pointless/
- johnisgood 1y agoI like the URL, "pointless". :D I wonder if they are going to do anything about at least a thousand number of other items that may be used to cause bodily harm to a person. What about something related, such as forks?! Bags?
- sharperguy 1y agoA better analogy would be a balaclava. Lots of legitimate uses but it's uncommon to see people wearing them day to day and is very popular with criminals. But we don't imagine we could ban balaclavas to prevent crime.
- fifticon 1y agoIt depends on what you mean by 'ban'. In the country where I live (Denmark), they are very much banned, unless you can demonstrate your legitimate current use case for them. In particular, you are not allowed to wear them in public places where people gather or gather in groups. And 'beating up cops anonymously' is not an approved use case :-) The rule as I understand it, also covers [sic] extreme religious dress rules for women. Here is the relevant section from our current laws: https://danskelove.dk/straffeloven/134b https://danskelove.dk/straffeloven/134b
- robertlagrant 1y agoI used to wear one as a kid in the UK in the winter. They weren't invented for crime.
- Y_Y 1y ago> They weren't invented for crime. Not literally, but there was some criminally bad warfare going on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Balaclava https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Balaclava
- robertlagrant 1y agoKnitwear is often a cause for conflict[0]! [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jersey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jersey
- sapphicsnail 1y agoI read the article and I don't see his it's connected. Maybe I missed something?
- TheNewsIsHere 1y agoI think the best way to prevent the sale of crime fridges to criminals would be to have national governments integrate the entirety of data that each nation has, from every level, on every citizen. Then we can create an API which market participants like Frigidaire and Bosch can use to query whether a purchase should be permitted based on the purchaser. /s, if not obvious. Strange times.
- harvey9 1y agoI bought a used fridge and flashed it with a custom ROM
- throwing_away 1y agoI think all reasonable citizens could agree that a simple licensure for fridge ownership is for the best. Besides, we can use the extra license taxes from people with multiple fridges to raise funds for the schools. You don't hate the children, do you?
- johnisgood 1y agoExactly, and I hope we keep track of all fridge purchases with biometrics from customers (and as thus, should not be able to order from online). That better be hooked up to an API that the cops can query at any time.
- dessimus 1y agoDon't forget about range tops: they are used for cooking, and what is "cooked"? Methamphetamines. When will the police stop Big Appliance! /s
- deaddodo 1y agoThe base purpose of a range top is cooking. The base purpose of a gun is shooting things, generally living breathing ones. I could kill a guy with a stick, a rock, a frying pan, a blanket, etc…pretty much most things; however, none of those things exist expressly for that purpose. Simple concept, huh?
- johnisgood 1y agoThat is what I have been trying to say, too.
- voxic11 1y agoMy guns are made for hunting, are your saying they should be exempted from this discussion (are you only talking about handguns and automatic rifles)?
- deaddodo 1y ago> The base purpose of a gun is shooting things, generally living breathing ones. Sounds like your hunting rifle still qualifies.
- qualeed 1y agoI think people are misinterpreting your comment? Or I am. What I think you are saying is: The police are arguing both sides (in typical fashion). On one side, the police say that GrapheneOS is for criminals because of its privacy, etc. However the police are also trying to convince people that GrapheneOS is not private or secure, in an attempt to sway people from using it.
- johnisgood 1y agoYes, the police are arguing both sides, according to what I have read[1], and that they are not doing it in English but in other languages, e.g. Swedish. I am not sure why I am getting down-voted though. [1] https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784488424006190 https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/114784488424006190 and so forth.
- qualeed 1y ago>I am not sure why I am getting down-voted though. My guess is the ambiguous use of "they", interpreting "they" as GrapheneOS instead of the police. That makes it seem like you are criticizing GrapheneOS rather than the police.
- johnisgood 1y agoI edited my comment. I thought it was obvious because it was the police claiming the former, and connected the two with an "AND". I was not criticizing GrapheneOS. Thanks!
- antonvs 1y agoIt was obvious, people just have terrible reading comprehension, and they also don't read to the end of a comment if something near the beginning triggers them.
- johnisgood 1y agoI came to the same conclusion based on some of the comments addressed to me. It is like they did not even bother reading the comment to which I replied, or the last 2 comments.
- t_mahmood 1y agoIt's like my bank's application, your mobile with all the latest security update is prohibited, because the bootloader is unlocked. But your 6-year-old mobile that received its last security update 3/4 years ago is fine!
- hluska 1y agoThis whole thing is quite the stretch. Someone who clearly has no idea what they’re talking about acted like a know it all on a forum. I don’t see how that’s evidence of a coordinated attack. Police saying dumb things about security tech is nothing new either nor is it a smoking gun. Occam’s razor applies even when we want to believe a cool story.
- NoGravitas 1y ago> “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.” - Umberto Eco, Ur-Fascism
- giantg2 1y agoThis is basically the ploy with many secure phones - say it's for criminals but actually have a backdoor for law enforcement. I wonder if there's some exploit on the Pixel or Graphene that law enforcement is now aware of.
- reverendsteveii 1y agowell if it doesn't work for protecting your data it doesn't work for protecting criminals' data as well, right? or is this a lot less about making rational sense and a lot more about manufacturing consent to violate our rights?